(Combined Special Report and Press Release – For Immediate Release)
October 2, 2014
By: John E. Fiorentino
Herewith we issue our
Further Progress Report from the IG, and Updated MH370 Search Area Recommendation 26th September 2014
The Location of MH370 – Dr. Bobby Ulich – 25 September 2014
MH370 Search Priorities
Michael L. Exner
MH370 Independent Group Member
Almost immediately after the loss of Flight MH370 on March 8, 2014. I instituted an independent investigation of the tragedy. Since that time the data (such as it is) from Inmarsat has been analyzed and modeled. A preliminary review of the available audio recordings was undertaken with audio expert Steve Barber. Several leads were developed from the audio review which are still being investigated. And, we have researched and reported on the putative underwater acoustic “pings,” as well as communicating with various aviation experts and scientists. Findings in many cases have been reported to the media, investigative authorities and the general public.
I would just wish to acknowledge Dr. Bobby Ulich for his hard work in producing his White Paper.
Scope of Response
Again, in the interest of brevity this report will focus on the major flaw in all 3 reports being reviewed rather than serve as a line by line analysis. Those wishing more detailed information may wish to consult my previous response of 13/Sept/14. The contacts provided at the end of this report may also be used to request further information.
Narrowing the Width of the Search Area
In the previous response of 13/Sept/2014 I dealt with the critical issue of narrowing the width of the MH370 search area. All 3 reports make this recommendation. However, the reasoning utilized to come to this conclusion suffers from numerous questionable assumptions and poor logic.
I will not quibble here about any minor differences between the papers but rather target the idea universal to all 3 reports that the 9M-MRO aircraft was in a spiral dive at 00:19:29.
Assumptions and Leaps of Logic
In order for the 3 papers to maintain the aircraft was in a “spiral dive” at 00:19:29 they MUST assume that:
The BFO values are accurate
The BFO values reflect a substantial loss in altitude
The BFO values are not influenced by power variations or load variability
The APU functioned as designed
The TAC (Thrust Asymmetry Compensation) did not function as designed
The RAT deployed as designed
The Pilot(s) or hijackers were dead (or not at the controls)
The Pilots or hijackers if alive wanted to commit suicide
The BFO values, even if accurate do not represent the descent phase of a phugoid mode
The “Log On” request by the SDU was caused by power restoration from the APU and not some other cause.
The “partial handshake” at 00:19:37 was caused by an impact only several seconds later and not by a simple power loss.
The absence of logged records after 00:19:37 was due to aircraft impact and not simple power loss to the SDU.
The Most Likely Scenario
Aircraft can either have inherent aerodynamic stability (the typical case), or de-facto stability, in which stability requirements are met with the aid of a control system augmented with sensors and feedback. For example, in order to achieve maximum maneuverability, the F-18 lacks inherent stability, and can’t be flown without some operational brainpower on board in addition to the pilot. The Boeing 777 has relaxed inherent longitudinal static stability, which produces efficiencies in cruise from a more rearward c.g. and a physically lighter tail structure than otherwise possible.
Flightlab Ground School 7. Longitudinal Dynamic Stability
Copyright Flight Emergency & Advanced Maneuvers Training, Inc. dba Flightlab, 2009. All rights reserved. (Used under “Fair Use” for Non-profit, educational or news reporting purposes)
So, the Boeing 777 has “inherent aerodynamic stability.” It is extremely unlikely then that the 9M-MRO aircraft would behave like a fighter jet, or drop like a rock under normal conditions even after a dual engine flameout.
Simulation Example Explains Aircraft's Motion
Reproduced below is a description of a Flight Simulation in a 777-2 full motion zero flight time approved simulator.
We let it run out of fuel at FL 250 in track hold and alt capture. However it would not make any difference what mode it was in as everything would drop out. In real life one engine uses fractionally more fuel per hour than the other and there is typically a difference between main tanks of a few hundred kilos, so we had a 300 kg difference between the contents of the left and right tank.
When the first engine failed TAC (Thrust asymmetry compensation) automatically applied rudder. The speed reduced from 320 knots indicated to 245 knots indicated. It was able to maintain 245 knots and FL250. When the second engine failed the rudder trim applied by TAC was taken out and the trim went to zero. The autopilot dropped out and the flight controls reverted to direct mode. The speed initially came back to 230 knots but then the nose started to lower. The nose continued to lower and the rate of descent increased to 4,000 feet per minute, the nose kept lowering and the descent rate increased to 7,500 feet per minute with a bank angle that increased to 25 degrees. The speed at this point had increased to 340 knots indicated, above VMO but there was no horn as it was on limited electrics. About this point the RAT (Ram air turbine) chipped in and the CDUs and copilot's PFD (Primary flight display) came alive. The flight controls stayed in direct mode. The eicas screen was full of messages like pitot heat, flight controls, APU fault (The APU had tried to autostart due to double engine failure but failed due to no fuel to start it) low fuel pressure etc.
Then with a max descent rate of almost 8,000 feet per minute the nose started to slowly rise and keep rising. We had dropped to about FL170 but the nose slowly rose up to 6 degrees pitch up and we started climbing at about 3000 feet per minute and the bank angle reduced to only 5 degrees. It climbed back up to FL210 at which point the speed had come back to 220 knots and then the nose dropped down again and we were soon back to descending at 8000 feet per minute. So basically a series of phugoid oscillations with bank angle between 5 and 25 degrees and pitch attitude between about 9 degrees nose down and 5 degrees pitch up. It was losing about 8000 feet and then gaining about 3 or 4000 feet with airspeed fluctuating between 220 and 340 knots.
We didn't watch it all the way down due to time constraints and stopped the experiment at 10,000 feet but it was consistent all the way down.
Only Indicator of a “spiral dive” are Questionable BFO Values
Based on our prior response to the IG and the data presented here I believe there is no empirical evidence to back up the notion of a “spiral dive” by the 9M-MRO aircraft The IG in its latest report injects a one line mention of a possible “phogoid mode” which was completely absent from its report of 9/Sept/2014 which I have already addressed. This small “concession” I believe is a direct result of an e-mail exchange between myself and Mike Exner, an IG member.
The above flight simulation also gives a good description of the TAC (Thrust asymmetry compensation) component which the IG seems to indicate was a catalyst to their “spiral dive” scenario. In reality, if TAC functioned properly, it would have acted to prevent the aircraft from entering a spiral. Regardless of which way the TAC system was deflected , upon the flameout of the second engine TAC would have returned to its pre-flameout mode and the aircraft would again be trimmed for normal flight/glide.
I wish to stress again in the strongest terms my opposition to any narrowing of the MH370 search area. I believe the implementation of this idea is without merit and if implemented could possibly be the cause of a complete failure in the search effort. If I am wrong, the aircraft may still be found under the current search parameters. If the IG's suggestion is implemented it increases the chances the plane will never be found.
I will shortly be releasing a report detailing the coordinates where I believe the Flight of MH370 terminated. This complete analysis will provide the flightpath and desired final destination of Flight MH370 as I see it. The report also accounts for the lack of wreckage found to date.
Copyright 2014 – J.E. Fiorentino – All Rights Reserved
A PDF copy of this report may be attained by making a request by e-mail at the address provided.
For further information contact:
John E. Fiorentino
PO Box 324
Oakhurst, NJ 07755 USA